"...to win share against Linux and OpenOffice.org...". Looks like somebody is scared. I like that very much :D But seriously, who would take that job? Somebody who understands a lot about Linux but then decides to "fight" against it?

He's making a good point and I believe that protection against harassment on the internet should be better. On the other hand I think the huge amount of crap people post is a inevitable side effect of the ease of communication the internet has brought. You cant filter "stupid" stuff, after all, whos to decide what is stupid and what not?

As if people that want to listen to phone calls cared about copyright laws.

He's in the fortunate position of being able to increase his job-market value, while actually working. If you really want to change your job, you might have to quit and start again from scratch - whether you are nervous or not.

Best advice I've heard is to make small changes that get you closer to your desired job, while utilizing your existing skillset, like asking for additional duties at your current employer. This way, you avoid the start-from-scratch phase you describe.

That's great advice. I took a position as a dev lead at my job a while back because I wanted more experience dealing with clients, budgets, estimating, and delegating tasks. It's been far more stressful than my previous position, and my pay has yet to increase accordingly (though it should within the next month), but I consider it a win for all the experience it has provided me. I look forward to applying these skills to my own projects.

I agree. But still interesting why he does it.

I think that the 'why' looses it intrigue when you consider that there is little done to convey their purpose to anyone other than 1)the pissed off blog owner and 2)their competing frienemies and script kiddies...

"... we do this to protest against somethings, for example the last month I think there was a genocide agains the Uygurs in the west of China and we just hacked around one thousand websites of the chinesse government. Our web page is: www.ayyildiz.org..."

It seems more is said in this short interview about their supposed 'moral motivations' and logic for these attacks than the attacks themselves actually conveyed.

To make a real stance against something, wouldn't it prove far more beneficial to compose a multi language (Translate) well thought out argument instead of posting a few Turkish sentences and a flag Gif as a protest? A few lines of CSS and javascript to actually provide usable reference and material to viewers about what it is you feel strongly enough about to actually hack another's property over?

I feel like this type of hack is more of a <i>"I'm a rebel (because I am a kid) and am going to tag this bridge because I have a can of paint and no one is there to catch me doing it - I'm a protester because I tagged it 'Pigs suck!'"</i>

But again, in my day when 16 year olds where 'acting out against society' with netbus and BackOrifice on my school pcs

For me its another example for how the term "hacker" is being wrongly generalized and how easy its to claim to be one.

The first line of your comment is pretty insightful. The rest, not so much. It seems you've fallen victim to exactly what you're criticizing.

Because defacing a website is the same as stealing or tattooing someone's face.

Nice moral balance you have there.

well no, but 50,000 websites...

For me this move makes sense. I'always saw Shuttleworth as the head of the Ubuntu Community and not as the CEO of a company. I'really believe that doing what he will be doing in the future suits him better.